Thanks Obamacare!

RCL 138T Issue Brief

Chris Messner

Executive Summary:
Obamacare; also known as the Democratic healthcare cure-all.
President Obama makes and has made many promises to improve the
lives of Americans, however some of these promises often fall flat.
Obamacare makes some good points, but it clearly has some issues
and needs to be reformed. The promises Obama makes end up only
applying to certain groups of people, even though this new form of
healthcare is an attempt at equality. There must be changes made to
a number of the current healthcares policies, because as of right now
it is detrimental to many Americans, especially in comparison to their
previous healthcare. While the premise of the system is good, it is
necessary to mitigate some of the changes that were made if we hope
to express realistic equality for all Americans. The first issue to be
remedied, is that Obamacare focuses too heavily on a lack of
discrimination when paying for healthcare, when in the end it still
discriminates against both homosexuals and the wealthy. Health
related discrimination is a real issue, however the two groups that
Obamacare taxes more have no scientific reason to be discriminated
against. It also makes many people to pay more money under a guise
of providing cheaper coverage to the common people, by forcefully
encouraging that everyone pays for healthcare, and raising the
needed medical cost for tax deductions.

The Issue:
Obamacares primary focus is to expand coverage and reduce
costs (4). The problem is that the system does not accomplish
Obamas desires effectively, at least not for everybody.
One of the key concepts to Obamacare is that nobody can be
charged extra based on gender, race, origin, age, or disability (8). This
is seems like a noble idea, nobody
in the country can be discriminated
against when it comes to medical

Another Example: Womens Cervical

Cancer rates
by race, clearly higher for Black
women

care. However, unlike most discrimination, insurance companies may

have a right to charge differently depending on many of these factors.
According to (10), race, gender, origin, and certainly age have different
impacts upon the health of an individual. Chinese people tend to have
better health than Caucasian and African people. Pakistanis tend to
have the lowest levels of health. Cancer is also much less prevalent in
African people, but much more prevalent in Ireland and Scotland.
Heart disease and stroke probabilities are much higher in men than in
women. Elderly people have many complications, including a 50% risk
for hypertension past the age of 80.

Ultimately, the reason that

the premiums were higher for
different people and lower for
others, were because the
insurance companies were
listening to what scientific
research was telling them. There
was nothing unfair about it, different people have different risks, and
as a business the insurance companies were simply looking after
themselves. While it is indeed noble for Obama to say that there will
be no discrimination when it comes to healthcare payments, it is
honestly foolish in a scientific light. Now, the prices for many people
who are at a higher risk for medical complications will go down, and
the prices for relatively healthy people will go up. But this is not the
only problem with Obamacares stance on discrimination. Obamacare
does not stop discrimination against gay, lesbian, and bisexual people
(13).
Sexual orientation can still be legally discriminated against. The
main fear for sexual orientation concerning diseases comes from
sexually transmitted diseases. The Center for Disease Control (11)
does voice its concerns that statistically homosexual men have a much
higher rate of developing an STD, and due to STDs homosexual men
are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer. Although, it is

important to remember that the diseases the government worries

about are sexually transmitted, and that means that the diseases are
spread much differently than diseases proliferated through normal
transmission. While normal viral or bacterial transmission of diseases
(and the random cellular mutations that cause cancer) are generally
random with some increased infection potentials in certain groups of
people, STDs are transmitted through sexual secretions or the blood
(1). STD transmission is part of the risk
for having unprotected sex, and this is
something that homosexual people can
choose not to do. Obamacare should
not discriminate against a group of
people, when the reason they have a
higher chance of disease is based upon
an activity they can choose to either perform or abstain from. This is
why once again Obamacare does not make good sense scientifically. If
this new healthcare wanted to discriminate against homosexuals, it
should have discriminated against the other human population groups
as well. Especially because homosexuality only increases tendency to
perform certain risky acts, it does not change the chemical make-up of
a person and make he or she any more susceptible to diseases like
hypertension and leukemia.

Now, while it is clear that Obamacare fails to cover all of the

American people equally, it makes paying for that coverage
problematic as well. The idea is that Obamacare will lower its prices
for the average man, and thus overtime premiums will be lower, by
2500 a year (14). It is actually difficult to see where Obamacare
believes it will get funded if it believes that it will cost less overall to do
more. Healthcare premiums have been rising since 2014 due to
Obamacare, and many families of the upper-middle class and higher
have seen coverage costs double or even triple. This is a serious issue,
because these families are forced to pay that new higher amount or
pay a tax penalty which is based on marriage status, income, and
other factors. That is of course unless a family has an exemption,
which means that there is a specific reason as to why they cannot and
should not pay for healthcare (3) These exemptions include families
with annual incomes below
$10,150 for an individual and $20,300 for a couple, as well as
homelessness and imprisonment. Forbes states that High earners
(people who make over 200,000 individually or 250,000 as a couple
have received a 0.9% overall tax increase for Obamacare alone, and
there is an additional 3.8% tax increase for investment income (5).
The wealthy now have even higher taxation rates, when their rates
were much steeper to begin with. The highest potential income tax
rate is now 39.6%, for people who alone make over $400,000 or as a

couple make over

$450,000, and the Affordable Care Act has now added 0.9% on top of
that, as well as the 3.8% tax on investment income (2). To compare,
someone who makes $500,000 annually will pay about 202,500 in
taxes (there are various tax deductions and exemptions, this is just a
rough estimate). Whereas someone who makes $50,000 will pay
substantially less than $20,250 (if the 40.5% tax rate applied), because
they will not be even close to the threshold for the highest taxation
rate. This is completely unfair, when both the middle-class and the
wealthy party have worked hard to earn their money. In the end,
taxation on the wealthy is always going to be higher, that is an
unavoidable fact. Many upper-class individuals wish for their taxes to
be higher, because they acknowledge the fact that not everybody has
the same opportunities that they had (6). Although is 40.5% of their
income anywhere close to fair? There is no reason for taxation on the
wealthy to continually rise, people should not be punished merely
because they have earned a good salary.

Yet another troublesome issue with Obamacares funding is that

it has raised the threshold for tax deductions based on medical bills.
Families originally had to pay the already steep price of 7.5% of their
income per year in medical bills before deductions would be
considered, and Obamacare has raised that to 10%. In a household
that makes $200,000 total, the family will have to shell out $20,000
dollars that year towards their medical bills to even be considered for a
deduction. Now unless a family member is extremely sick, that is not
going to happen. This new healthcare plan simply increases the
taxation on groups of people who are moderately sick or possess high
incomes.

How to Fix It:

The question is, what has to be done with Obamacare. Clearly its
heart is in the right place, President Obama designed the system with
the goal in mind of increasing access to healthcare while
simultaneously lowering the price. Money does not simply grow on
trees however, and it is where he decided to garner funds from that
Obamacares problems ultimately lie. As mentioned the money comes
in many different forms of taxation, or in the case of the 10% medical
bill, lack of tax deduction. The taxes have the greatest impact upon
people in the upper-middle to wealthy classes, and this is ultimately
unfair. Once again the healthcare plan that focuses on

nondiscrimination is discriminating. These upper classes have no

reason to be taxed harder, besides the fact that they have earned a
good sum of money in their lives via the sweat of their own brow. To
begin cutting down on this excessive taxation upon the wealthy,
Obamacares lack of discrimination should be reversed. The
aforementioned scientific data shows that different people all have
different health statuses, so some discrimination cannot hurt when it
comes to health insurance. But the most recent form of discrimination
was much too harsh. Until Obamacare, women apparently paid an
average of 1 billion more per year for health insurance, which is
absolutely ridiculous (9). There should be a limit as to how much extra
a person can be charged based upon their ethnicity, gender, age, and
other factors. The plan should not severely punish anyone just
based upon who they are, but it is necessary to realize that the
different chemical make-ups of each person makes them more or less
susceptible to certain infections.
One other problem with Obamacare that must be corrected is the
new increase in annual medical bill costs required for tax deduction.
10% is much too high. 7.5% was high to begin with, but necessarily
so, because if the deduction was too low then most people would be
writing off their medical bills. This new percentage of 10% should be
lowered to its initial percentage of 7.5%.

A final issue that must be confronted is the tax penalty for

lacking healthcare. While it may be beneficial in the end, getting more
people covered by health insurance, it is ultimately unconstitutional.
All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of
Representatives; but the Senate may propose of concur with
amendments as on other bills (12). What this statement from the
Constitution is saying is that to ensure that no one branch can tax
without the consent from other branches. In the case of Obamacare,
taxation is modified under the suggestion from the executive branch
alone. Chief Justice John Roberts allowed this to happen even though it
went against the Constitution, and proponents of Obamacare insist
that the tax is not attempting to be a tax, but a means of changing
peoples attitudes towards healthcare. Realistically, this tax is an
unconstitutional mandated payment, something that the Founding
Fathers were desperately trying to avoid. This may not seem like a big
deal now, but if a president can mandate a tax now, who is to stop
him/her from mandating more in the future? This mandated tax should
be removed entirely, as it is borderline illegal, and puts many families
in a tough spot by practically requiring healthcare payment.

Practicality:

It would not be difficult to tweak Obamacare. As previously

mentioned Obamacare is founded on a non-Constitutional basis, I do
not see why there could not be some simple rule changes to this all-but
illegal document, at the very least to make it Constitutional and
remove the tax penalty. Also, the current majority in
Congress are Republicans, and I feel that the policies
I have advocated for are right up their alley. It would
not be difficult for Republicans in congress to lobby
John Boehner, Current
Republican
Speaker of the House

for an adjustment of Obamacare, not to

remove it entirely but simply to fix it.

Counterpoints:
There would be objections by Democratic candidates about how
healthcare discrimination is wrong, or how the wealthy should be
taxed until they are poor. However I feel as though this issue brief has
already addressed these issues. Discrimination is wrong when it
comes to civility and human interactions, but statistically it has been
proven that different people have different susceptibilities. The
wealthy have absolutely no reason to be discriminated against and
taxed even more under Obamacare. They are not any less fit or
healthy, they only have more money; money that they worked hard
for, money that does not deserve to be forcefully taken. Overall there
is nothing in my recommendations that is eccentric or outlandish. I

feel as though it would be accepted and understood, because these

changes to Obamacare would benefit the nation as a whole as they
attempt to make Obamacare a better functioning healthcare system.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, Obamacare is a flawed healthcare plan that
requires a bit of tweaking. Once certain conditions have been met, it
does possess potential to be a great service to this nation, but until
they are it is a serious hindrance to the wealthy, the homosexual, and
the moderately ill.

Journalist Jennifer Rubin

calls
for a change to

References:

1. About Sexually Transmitted Diseases. TeensHealth. The Nemours

Foundation,

01 Jan. 2014. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

<http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/stds/std.html>

2. Bell, Kay. "5 Higher Taxes For Wealthy Taxpayers | Bankrate.com."

Bankrate.

Disqus. Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/higher-taxes-forwealthy-

taxpayers-1.aspx>

3. "Exemption from the Fee for Not Having Health Insurance."

HealthCare. U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Web. 09
Apr. 2015. <https://www.healthcare.gov/fees-exemptions/exemptionsfrom-the-fee/>

4. "How to Fix Obamacare." The Economist. The Economist

Newspaper, 20 Sept.

2014.

Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21618788-americashealth-

care-system-remains-dysfunctional-it-could-be-made-

better-how-fix>

5. "How Will 'Obamacare' Affect Your Tax Bill?" Forbes. Forbes

Magazine, 1 Mar. 2013.

Web. 09 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.forbes.com/sites/learnvest/2013/03/01/how-willobamacare-affect-your-tax-bill/>

6. Frank, Robert. "Even Millionaires Think The Rich Should Pay Higher
Taxes." Huff

Post Business. The Huffington Post, 6 May 2014. Web.

09 Apr. 2015.
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/06/millionaires-taxessurvey_n_5272647.html>

7. Nguyen, Hang, and Roberton Williams. "How Big Is the ACA Tax
Penalty?" Tax

Policy

Center. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

<http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/acacalculator.cfm>

8. "ObamaCare Facts: Facts on the Affordable Care Act." Obamacare

Facts. Web. 08

Apr. 2015. <http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-

facts/>

9. "ObamaCare No Discrimination." Obamacare Facts. Web. 09 Apr.

2015.

<http://obamacarefacts.com/no-discrimination/>

10. Rull, Gurvinder. Diseases and Different Ethnic Groups

Information. Patient. 19

Aug. 2011. Web. 08 Apr. 2015. <

http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Diseases-and-Different-EthnicGroups.htm>

11. "Sexually Transmitted Diseases." Gay and Bisexual Men's Health.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 02 July 2014. Web. 08 Apr.
2015.

<http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/STD.htm>

12. Shapiro, Ilya. "The Obamacare "Tax" That Chief Justice Roberts
Invented Is Still

Unconstitutional." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 12 May

2014. Web. 09 Apr.

2015.

<http://www.forbes.com/sites/ilyashapiro/2014/05/12/the- obamacaretax-that-chief-justice-roberts-invented-is-still-

unconstitutional/>

13. Terkel, Amanda. "Obamacare Bars Discrimination Based On

Gender Identity But

Not Sexual Orientation: HHS Official." Huff Post

Politics. The Huffington Post, 8 Apr. 2014. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/08/obamacarelgbt_n_5111399.html>

14. Viebeck, Elise. O-Care Premiums to Skyrocket. The Hill. Capitol

Hill Publishing,

19 Mar. 2014. Web. 08 Apr. 2015.

<http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/201136-obamacarepremiums-are-

about-to-skyrocket>

Graphics:

Obamacare Logo (1) http://blog.heartland.org/2013/09/a-short-guideto-obamacare/

Ethnic Differences (2)

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/cervical/statistics/race.htm

D.C. World Cartoon (3)

http://itmakessenseblog.com/files/2011/01/Obamacare-cartoon.jpg

Obamacare Tax Penalty (4)

http://obamacarefacts.com/obamacare-individual-mandate/

Obamacare in a Nutshell (5)

http://images.sodahead.com/profiles/0/0/1/6/6/5/8/2/9/Obamacare-in-aNutshell-9384947922.jpeg

Boehner (6)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_United_States_House_of_Re
presentatives

Jennifer Rubin (7)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/02/republican-alternative-toobamacare_n_4877100.html